Uncertainty over trade tariffs is already putting the squeeze on US companies. The recent tit-for-tat moves by the US and China sent ripples across the markets that turned into bigger waves across supply chains around the world. But this and other trade mêlées are adding another level of risk to cross-border shippers that go deep. Companies have to be agile enough to react to these and other changes and adapt their supply chains to avert disaster.

Chances are, you’re not the only one looking to reduce demurrage and detention fees. Recently, a coalition of shippers, freight forwarders, and intermediaries urged US maritime regulators to make it easier to challenge congestion-related fees that container lines and marine terminals impose for delays that were out of their control. Terminals responded that it would cause chaos at the ports. Just this past Monday, the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) voted unanimously to investigate further the concern of the coaltion, a welcome validation for shippers in the wake of ever-increasing volume, labor disputes and port congestion.

The FMC will discuss whether policy is needed to prevent what the coalition of shippers deemed “unfair” assessment of free time-related fees. While detention and demurrage fees have rarely been light for importers, recent instances of extreme port congestion – such as the aftermath of liner carrier Hanjin Shipping’s sudden bankruptcy, or the West Coast longshoreman’s strike in 2014 and 2015 – have exacerbated the issue. And container volume continues to rise faster than port terminals can expand.

Of course, importers and exporters will continue to rack-up large fees while the FMC slowly deliberates. But demurrage and detention fees are more than just a “cost of doing business”; they often trigger a ripple effect that throws exception into the planned supply chain flow. These exceptions lead to additional costs that add up. While many freight managers accept them as a line item, they have a detrimental impact of the bottom line.

A couple of months ago, we reported in our blog that India’s comprehensive dual Goods and Services Tax (GST) would become a reality on July 1, 2017. Hailed as India’s biggest tax reform, the new program is now in full effect and has replaced the complex multiple indirect tax structure.

On May 14, 2017, the French Republic elected the youngest president of its history, Emmanuel Macron, who promised to reform the country and better prepare it for 21st century challenges. This is a big deal for the global trading community and the EU because France has the world's sixth largest economy by IMF estimates and the tenth largest economy by Purchasing Power Parity figures. It is the third largest economy in Europe.

In the wake of this historic election, there is one particular French trade aspect to consider and whether it’s ripe for reform: the peculiar French indirect taxes. Sure, France may have done away with their king a while ago, but some say France is still the King of Indirect Taxes!

On June 21st, Amber Road in conjunction with American Shipper broadcasted a webinar entitled, Framing the Total Landed Cost Picture. Our presenters, Suzanne Richer and Phanibhushan Reddy from Amber Road, received several questions throughout the webinar, but unfortunately we did not have time to address them all during the live broadcast. We have compiled their answers into a Q&A document - here is a preview: